Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow (2004) User Reviews

Watch out Captain

[Prismark10 · 7/10 · 31 July 2013]

Sky Captain was a risk, one that did not pay off but you have to admire its audacity.

It was all shot in digital with actors in front of a giant green screen. It pays homage to the black and white Flash Gordon type serials that used to be repeated on TV when I was a kid.

The film is in a steampunk style combining art deco, pulp fiction, film noir and serial film styles of the between the war years.

The story is straightforward, New York is being attacked by giant robots, famous scientists are disappearing and the protagonists race around the world in search of Dr Totenkopf played by Laurence Olivier via the use of archive footage.

Although the script and pacing could be better, the visuals are glorious and the actors are top notch getting in to the spirit of adventure. Angelina Jolie is the standout and sexy as the British Navy pilot with a spot on accent.

The first time director did well in getting an A list class and although it disappointed at the box office and critics as a whole were not too impressed.

Like the film Tron from 1982, I suspect its reputation will be enhanced as the years go on.

Fascinating Visuals in CGI Homage to Classic Serial Cinema

[gftbiloxi · 7/10 · 29 March 2005]

Computer generated special effects have been around for quite some time now, and often questionably so, but they come into their own with Kerry Conran's SKY CAPTAIN AND THE WORLD OF TOMORROW--an innovative film that failed in theatrical release but which now makes a big splash in the home market. And whether you love it or hate it, SKY CAPTAIN is likely to cast a very long shadow indeed.

As a concept, the film seems to be based on the popular serials of the 1930s and 1940s. This is not limited to the use of an improbable plot fueled by special effects and cliffhanger action sequences, but it extends to the dialogue and characters as well, all of which are typical of such celebrated serials as BUCK ROGERS, CAPTAIN MARVEL, SPY SMASHER, and THE CRIMSON GHOST. The film also draws specific plot elements from such diverse sources as KING KONG, LOST HORIZON, THE WIZARD OF OZ, and WHEN WORLDS COLLIDE, to name but a few.

The story is typical of serials. "Girl Reporter" Polly Perkins (Gwyneth Paltrow) is doing a story on missing scientists--and when giant metal robots attack New York she unexpectedly holds a clue to their origin. She and Sky Captain (Jude Law) form an uneasy alliance to get to the bottom of things. With an assist from Sky Captain's faithful sidekick Dex (Giovanni Ribisi) and the disconcertingly military Frankie (Angelina Jolie), the two search the world--and finally track the wicked Dr. Totenkopf (Laurence Olivier, resurrected via CGI) to his secret lair.

The look of the film follows suit. The live cast worked on a blue screen set, and with the exception of a single set, the costumes, and items the live actors had to handle, everything you see on the screen was created in the computer and added after the fact. A great many people have described the look of the film as "deco," an arts movement associated with the 1920s; this is misleading. It would be more accurate to describe it as a mixture of pre-WWII arts movements filtered through a 1950s sensibility, and the result is like nothing so much as a pulp science fiction magazine cover unexpectedly come to life.

Now, how much you like this will depend to a great extent on how clearly you recognize the film styles and specific films that have clearly influenced it. If you know nothing about serials, for example, you are likely to be appalled by the flatness of the script and Paltrow's one-note performance; on the other hand, if you are a serial fan, you'll immediately recognize that the script is reflective of such serials as SPY SMASHER and that Paltrow echoes Linda Sterling, famous for such serials as THE CRIMSON GHOST. It wouldn't be too much to say that in many respects SKY CAPTAIN AND THE WORLD OF TOMORROW is akin to an inside joke.

But most particularly, your liking for this film will depend on how you react to the visuals. I am not a great fan of CGI when it is used to bolster live action films such as GLADIATOR or TITANIC; I can usually spot the CGI and I find it distracting. But I have to come down in favor of SKY CAPTAIN: this isn't an effort to "make it look real;" this is an effort to make a totally artificial world, and whether it be giant robots, Shangri-La, or Radio City Music Hall the designs are stunning and remarkably well executed. Whatever other shortcomings it may have, SKY CAPTAIN has incredible visual "WOW!" The film is currently available in a DVD release that is visually handsome with superior sound, and the package contains a fair number of bonuses. Unfortunately, the two commentary tracks are less interesting than you might expect, but two short documentaries ("Brave New World" and "The Art of the World of Tomorrow") are quite good--and the original six minute short that inspired the film is fascinating. Not every one will get it, so I recommend you rent before you buy, but on the whole this is a show truly worth the money. Recommended.

Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer

Visually stunning and clever

[FilmOtaku · 7/10 · 21 September 2004]

I'll be the first to admit it. I went into 'Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow' with a lot of trepidation and even loathing. I didn't like the direction that cinema was taking with this film, featuring a backdrop that was mostly digital, because being a film purist, I used to relish the feel of actual celluloid in my hands, so this 'fake' creation was disturbing. I am still wary of this possible trend, but after seeing 'Sky Captain', I found that art can be realized in this medium.

'Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow' not only boasts one of the longest film titles in recent months, but a great cast: Jude Law as Joe 'Sky Captain' Sullivan, our hero, Gwyneth Paltrow as Polly Perkins, our intrepid reporter and Sullivan's former flame and Angelina Jolie as Capt. Franky Cook, a friend and ally of Joe's. There is an evil element threatening the Earth, and it is up to Joe and Polly to find out who is behind the threat, before Earth is destroyed.

One line is all it really takes to sum up the story, which is generally all it took to summarize the films 'Sky Captain' pays homage to. The story is good, and it certainly boasts one of the most entertaining endings that I can remember in recent years, but it is the presentation that is the biggest draw with 'Sky Captain'. The overall style is 1930's Art Deco mixed with bits of Neo-Futurism. The robots in the first half hour of the film look like something out of comic book, the clothes and character styles are most certainly inspired by the 1930's, and the backdrops and locations are very Deco. It's obvious that one of the advantages in producing a film in this manner is that the filmmaker can be as elaborate in design as possible, because the 'set design' was very rich and exciting.

As a lover of classic film, I found the numerous nods to the films of the 30's very refreshing. Several scenes or lines could have been construed as corny, but I found them to be presented with a giant wink at the audience. Because all of these aforementioned elements were done so well, this film was a huge success in my opinion. And despite my concerns (which are still prevalent in my mind) I can sincerely rave about and recommend 'Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow' to just about anyone who appreciates both art and good entertainment.

--Shel

Movie has a very interesting look and feel

[RmatthewC · 27 November 2004]

I had not read about the movie before watching it and was fascinated within the first several minutes and continued to enjoy it through to the end. This movie's unique look and feel is its primary vehicle.

If you are looking for a sophisticated plot, this movie was not made for you. The plot and acting were adequate enough to avoid ruining the visual picture. The makers applied a comic book feel to the movie that allowed for softer edges and sepia tones, both with the animated sets and the human characters. If a set does not look completely realistic, the viewer is not troubled because the set is consistent with everything you see in the movie.

Anyone who has ever edited video or worked with animation would have to appreciate the visual art and quality of this movie. Otherwise, it contains a decent story that would be worth watching at least once.

Nice little action romp, short of plot but heavy on effects and adventure

[filmbuff-36 · 7/10 · 2 December 2004]

As computer graphics are becoming more and more a part of movies, it only makes sense that eventually a film would come along that is completely computer animated with humans just inserted into the footage.

That's the feel of "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow," a strange but fun fantasy/action movie inspired by the likes of classic sci-fi comics like "Buck Rogers" and "Flash Gordan." The characters are essentially live-action people walking in front of green screen images, but it does all mesh together nicely, if not too nicely.

The year is 1939, and several famous German scientists have wound up missing. When plucky New York reporter Polly Perkins (Gwyneth Paltrow) is contacted by a scientist who fears that he's next, she discovers a diabolical plot by a mad scientist named Dr. Totenkopf (Laurence Olivier, thanks to some digital trickery).

Totenkopf has unleashed an army of massive robots on the world, and the call soon goes out to Joe "Sky Captain" Sullivan (Jude Law), a well-known hero-for-hire fighter pilot, to come to the rescue. Fate soon brings Perkins and Sullivan together again, having once been an item but now bitter over a past incident that left Sullivan in a Japanese prison camp.

They soon discover that Totenkopf is using his machines to raid the world's power supplies, but to what end they don't know. Skeptical at first, Sullivan soon changes his tune when the robots raid his base and make off with his chief mechanic and friend Dex Dearborn (Giovanni Ribisi). Committed to the task of stopping the scientist and rescuing his friend, Sullivan goes after Totenkopf with Perkins in tow, smelling a story exclusive that's too big to pass up.

"Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow" is a nice throwback to the old adventure serials of the 1940s, and the look and feel is certainly inspired by the Max Fleischer "Superman" cartoons of that era, particularly the 1941 short "Mechanical Monsters" whose title robots bear a striking resemblance to the ones in this film.

First time director Kevin Conran, also the screenwriter, clearly has respect for the source material of the era, and the movie certainly has a unique atmosphere to it. However, the problem is the visuals and production design command so much attention that the characters come off as ancillary at best.

As the "Sky Captain," Law gives a laid-back performance, not really in keeping with a world famous adventurer. He's certainly charming and handles the action scenes well, but he lacks the ambition necessary for the role.

As Perkins, Paltrow seems to be invoking the spirit of Superman's Lois Lane mixed with Underdog's Sweet Polly Purebred, and as such succeeds at being a nosy reporter who often get in trouble. But Paltrow never really brings Perkins to life, and she recklessly endangers countless numbers of lives and is never even berated for her actions.

Ribisi and Jolie both fair well though their characters just exist to advance the plot. It is Olivier's presence here that is the real eye opener. More than 2 decades after his death, the legendary actor is recreated for the movie in two scenes. It's a little disturbing to this critic however, sort of the digital equivalent of grave robbery. Along with the current plans to digitally insert the late George Burns into a new film as well, I don't think I agree with this usage of the technology.

Despite their shortcomings, the actors do give a nice try, but they're powerless against the scope of the film. "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow" is a cornucopia of technical wizardry that's fun to watch and then instantly forget. If the plot had been tooled around with a bit more, it might have become something more classic like "Raiders of the Lost Ark." However, what we have here is a wonderfully conceived artificial world with no humans to inhabit it.

7 out of 10 stars. It's a fun little popcorn movie and a throwback to the serials of yesteryear, but it just can't come together as anything more than a series of interesting set pieces.

Good, fun movie

[grantss · 7/10 · 20 December 2019]

Good, fun movie. Very stylishly done - the black-and-white tones gave it that graphic novel feel, and a WW2 feel. Central plot is so-so, but the adventures along the way are enthralling.

The Jude Law-Gwyneth Paltrow combination works a treat. The banter between them is fresh and often funny. Good support from Giovanni Ribisi and Angelina Jolie.

An artistic approach

[MihaiSorinToma · 7/10 · 7 September 2017]

When a series of scientists start disappearing and the city of New York gets attacked by an army of futuristic robots, a very curious reporter and a famous pilot team up to find the source of the problems which seem to point in the same direction. Thus, an intense, full of action search commences, in a desperate attempt to ultimately save the word from imminent destruction.

It's a beautifully filmed action movie, which puts the viewer into the middle of an old New York, where supernatural phenomenon seems to occur. Its artistic approach creates a wonderful and catchy atmosphere which lasts the entire movie, while its actors contribute in a pleasant and funny way to this bloomy action. Unfortunately, this is where the good parts end. The plot is very simplistic, linear and predictable, and to make matters worse, the movie is full of clichés which you simply cannot ignore. Their usage does not represent a tragedy, but when you exaggerate, like this film does, it becomes a bit disturbing for the viewer. While most CGI is well executed and a pleasure to look at, the producers seemed to omit a couple of sequences, which are choppy at best.

The overall impression is that the movie wasn't taking itself seriously, fact which could have represented an advantage if you ask me. To sum things up, it's beautifully filmed, well played, but with a below average plot which drags the whole thing down.

Well, I was sort of disappointed...

[turbo445 · 3/10 · 30 January 2005]

I've said this in other reviews, without a story, you can give the audience all the smoke and mirrors you want, still no one will give a damn.

The director seems to have a great eye for 30s art deco (which I love), and I think the idea of using all digital backgrounds and such could indeed be the wave of the future in movie making. However, it's obvious the director got so interested in the digital rendering of his movie, he forgot to film many scenes which would have enormously helped this surprisingly thinned-plotted film. (SPOILER) For crying out loud, they forgot to have a villain in this thing! OK they have one, but he's been dead for 20 years by the time the movie takes place. Conran misses the point of HAVING a villain. As far as action goes, well let's see, Sky Captain (Law) shoots down ONE robot, two or three of the flapping wing airplanes (before Dex (Ribisi) tells him to stop shooting them down!!!), and a couple robots, but mostly spends his time looking dashing and getting others to fight his battles for him. Paltrow as Polly or Peggy or Punky or whatever is totally wasted in this movie (the reviewer who comments on hers and Law's lack of chemistry is so right) and I for one got a little sick of seeing repeated shots of the top of her camera, showing she ONLY HAS TWO SHOTS LEFT, both of which she wastes subsequently in the movie, one uncomically, one quite funny, although I saw it coming from 70 years away. No one except Law and Paltrow have any significant time on screen, and that's the movie's real flaw. An audience doesn't identify with robots, they need a hero to root for, and a visible, despicable villain to hate. Without that, plus a good engaging story, all the CG in the world won't help.

I'm sorry I love it, I just can't help it...

[conmech · 8/10 · 16 November 2007]

This movie is somewhat the opposite of "Sin City". Sin City was a movie liked by everyone and made me feel stupid for not liking it. Sky Captain is the opposite I guess, despised by everyone and made me feel immature by liking it. But the movie is just too good not to like, sorry guys.

It gives the great atmosphere of old cinema plus comic books, and it does so perfectly using flying funny looking evil robots, strange laser guns, and comic-book like dialog. And it was the first time I said to myself "wow, Angelina Jolie is actually a good actress". She's nothing like her boob-flashing movies.

And story? For me a story is good as long as it's not boring. And this is a comic-book adaptation, it was MEANT to be silly, and it didn't bother me at all since I was busy enjoying the film. If u're a stiff businessman with no shred of child imagination and if u even hated Star Wars saying "hey, this can't happen in real life", then don't watch this movie. If u're a comic-books fan, watch it and love it. It has a great atmosphere, great visual effects, and it's exciting. And it's fun to watch.

A Distinctive Look At A Fantasy Future Where Past Is Present

[museumofdave · 7/10 · 6 May 2013]

This pulp adventure can be a good deal of fun if you haven't become jaded by sitting through contemporary blockbusters loaded with explosions and hurtling cars and noisy intrusions and expect more of the same. Not just a noisy film for the socially arrested post-pubescent male, this is a stylish film with a distinctive look, an homage to the serial thrills of the thirties, and it's fun to experience robots not really intended to scare much of anybody--just appealing to the budding inventor, perhaps.

It's a kid's joy this film has, reflected in the easy-going performances of Law, Ribisi, and Paltrow , their relationships reflecting some idea of thirties screwball comedy with a slight contemporary twist. Angelina Jolie is the joy of the film, perfectly in tune with the Wizard of Oz atmosphere pervading this computer-driven world.

If you want to immerse yourself in a genuine thriller, this is not your film, but if you would like to float a fantasy, share a kid's world loaded with references to the late 1930's (with no connection to reality) this is an amusing and visually arresting ride

Soooo many holes...

[messin18 · 1/10 · 10 July 2006]

This movie feels so EMPTY. IN every scene in the movie the maximum number of actors on the screen is like 10. Because everything was shot in front of a blue screen there are never really any extras and the movie just feels weird.

The ACTING was HORRIBLE! It's so obvious this was in front of a blue screen because all of the action scenes you can see the actor/actress wondering around half running when they should be running for their lives.. Looking at the floor for their marks...

Spoilers: Also you'll find yourself banging your head watching the movie. At one point at Sky Captain's home base they have like 100 planes sitting on the airstrip. They have advanced warning an attack is coming... So what do they do? nothing. All of the planes get blown up and yet again the ONLY person fighting back is the Sky Captain...

THE ENTIRE world is under attack and he's the ONLY person ever fighting back. At the very end of the movie you see hundreds of plains taking off finally... but what do they do? Nothing... the movie is over...

It's a good film to experience the entertainment and the whole setting of the 1930's. 9/10

[abalpn-99472 · 9/10 · 7 October 2021]

I have the DVD and I usually watch it sometimes. I like the aerial fights that Jude Law was in. It's just like the concept of Indiana Jones when this film was set in the 1930's. The special effects of the film were okay and I like how the machines operate. There were reviews saying that the film was not that good but for me, I enjoy the action and entertainment value. I'm not calling it bad but it was almost great.

RETRO SKY FI FUN!!

[MadamWarden · 7/10 · 31 May 2020]

This is a fun tongue in cheek romp in the style of 1950's SciFi adventure movies. Over the top, stylised fun. Even the really bad CGI adds to the fun.

The cast look like they had a blast filming too.

Just couldn't watch it

[allang-2 · 1/10 · 17 September 2004]

I like the time period, I like the attempt, but watching a movie that looks like I'm looking at it through a coke bottle gives me a headache. If I played computer games that were this blurry and out of focus, I would upgrade my computer. Could be that this was the look the director was after, but not so it hurts the eyes and you want to leave after 10 minutes. If I hadn't taken someone with me to this film, I was out of there. Even though it was a series and not a movie per say, Band of Brothers accomplished this. They made it look like WWII footage, with just a touch of graininess, but it was still a pleasure to watch. Movies need real people, with real sets, and real locations; Use CGI when it is appropriate, not for an entire film.

A truly unique film experience

[canadasbest · 19 September 2004]

You won't find many movies with the look of 'Sky Captain', the film has a style that is all its own.

Apparently set in the 1930s yet featuring technology most of us associate with a time in the 2030s, 'Sky Captain' does a good job of blending the old generation with the new. I really did like the glossy look of the visuals.

The story is not overly deep and I would have loved to see some more backstory development for some of the main players, but for what it is,the plot is easy enough to follow along too.

Jude Law and Gwyneth Paltrow have great chemistry together here and I'm glad things between them stayed constant through the film. I could write more here, but I won't spoil the ending for those who haven't seen it.

Despite the fact I enjoyed "Sky Captain", I am still thankful these films are the exception rather than the rule. I still prefer films with real (or at least partially real) sets and shooting locations. I've read comments here about the quality of the acting in this film and that's a pitfall for so-called "Blue screen films". Even a great actor has a challenge when standing against a blue screen and pretending to respond meaningfully to something that's not really there. The acting here isn't down right corny, but I believe if the key players had more real surroundings to play off of, the performances would have improved. I also think Angelina Jolie's "Frankie" character deserved more screen time.

'Sky Captain' is an interesting experiment and certainly a movie that will hold your attention for 90 or so minutes (the movie is pretty short in comparison to other blockbusters).

So, if you're curious, check it out, you likely will get something enjoyable out of it.

The World Of Tomorrow Revisited

[timdalton007 · 7/10 · 8 March 2016]

There are films that are at once throwbacks to another age while also looking forward to the future. 2005's Sky Captain And The World Of Tomorrow was just such as film. As its title may suggest, the film called back to the adventure serials of the 1930s and 1940s. Yet the way the film was made showed a potential way ahead for filmmakers. The results, while not perhaps as well appreciated at the time, continue to make for interesting viewing more than a decade later.

The best (and really only) way to look at the film is something of a throwback to an era gone by. Set in an alternate and more technologically advanced 1939, the film plays with many of the tropes and clichés found from the serials of the era. There's the dashing action hero in the form of the titular "Sky Captain" Joe Sullivan (Jude Law) and plucky female reporter Polly Perkins (Gwyneth Paltrow) in the lead roles. In aesthetic terms, the film draws much from the era as well from its costumes to World War II era aircraft such as Sky Captain's P-40 to the more science fiction and fantastical elements including mechanical monsters. Elsewhere, there's a number of Easter eggs hidden within the film as well including references to Orson Welles' infamous War Of The Worlds radio broadcast and the 1933 King Kong. For those who are fans of the era, the film is a feast.

Indeed the film on the whole is a visual feast. Not only does it back strong use of the diesel punk aesthetics, the filmmakers went to great lengths to give the film the feel of being from another era with its choice of lighting and camera angles that are suggestive of the era. Beyond that, the film is notable for another reason. Shot largely against blue screen, the film was one of the first to make use of the so-called "digital backlot" and the film is heavily reliant on CGI as a result. Most of the time it works though there are a handful of shots where the CGI and live action elements fail to believably work together though those moments are few and far between. It seems ironic that a film set much in an idealized and fantastical version of the past would be so reliant on computers to bring its "world of tomorrow" to life but it's something that makes the film standout.

The film is truly visionary, something that can't be said very often. Even after the passing of a decade, I'm hard pressed to think of another film like it. Kerry Conran does a magnificent job as director, especially a first time director, in orchestrating all of the various elements together in a single cohesive whole. For Conran's film combines actors, costumes, props, special effects and Edward Shearmur's heroic score to create a film that pulls from the past yet creates something exciting and fresh. That's no mean feat in this day and age.

For all of that though, the film is not without its weaknesses. Drawing heavily on those adventure serials for its inspiration, Sky Captain And The World Of Tomorrow also falls foul of some of its clichés. The characters are all drawn in the most vague and cardboard of terms though its due to the credit of Law, Paltrow, Michael Gambon and Angleina Jolie that they bring them to life as well as they do. That vagueness goes right to the plot as well which, in true serial style, is little more than a series of set pieces tied together with mini-cliffhangers to keep the audience's attention while not making much logical sense. For a film that transcends the low budget nature of many of those serials to present a visually stunning feast, it seems a shame that the script couldn't do that as well.

On the whole though, Sky Captain And The World Of Tomorrow is well worth watching. It combines together thrills of a bygone age with the visuals of that age and 21st century CGI to create a work that remains unique but also groundbreaking. Despite some flaws, it's a two hour action/adventure feast sure to please fans. Plus, perhaps, it might find the audience that missed it a decade ago and can enjoy it for what it is.

I liked it (not as much as 'Sin City')

[SnoopyStyle · 7/10 · 8 March 2014]

It's 1939. Intrepid reporter Polly Perkins (Gwyneth Paltrow) is investigating the disappearances of famous scientists. New York City is attacked by giant robots. Her ex-boyfriend Sky Captain (Jude Law) comes to the rescue just in the nick of time. There are attacks all over the world. They've been coming for the last 3 years and disappearing. The duo investigates the robots with the help of Sky Captain's mechanic Dex (Giovanni Ribisi).

It pays homage with a stylized 30s feel using modern green screen effects. The idea is great, but the look is a little too dark. The muted color pallet is there to emulate the black and white feel. I don't think that was really necessary. The concept, the costumes, and everything else create that feel already. The movie could use some bright primary colors. 'Sin City' is just simply more beautiful, and would obliterate the memory of 'Sky Captain' six months later.

Gwyneth Paltrow has good chemistry with Jude Law. The love triangle with Angelina Jolie is some fun. Gwyneth will have very similar chemistry with Robert Downey Jr as Pepper Potts. She's essentially playing the same character as the sassy side kick.

All Style and No Substance

[snow0r · 7/10 · 12 April 2005]

First off, the film looks great. Each scene looks like a cross between a computer game, made in the future, set in the past, and later drawn in a comic book. It's difficult not be impressed by the scenery, especially in the dogfights in whatever city the film's based in, and in the Ark towards the end, and in the mountains of Nepal, and...you get the point.

However, style aside, there isn't much else.

The decision to use blue screen technology or whatever it's called does however, have its downside. It all looks a little...fake. If you look closely, you can tell that the actors are looking at things that aren't really there, and its a little sad. The film only took around a month to make, and would have saved a lot of money on location shooting, extras, and actual props, so you cant help but feel that soon most of our films are going to be made this way.

The acting isn't great either. Gywneth is weak; her character is annoying and gives you no reason to like her. When you find out that the Sky Captain had an affair during their relationship, you cant really blame him. Jude does what he can; he seems to be enjoying himself in the superhero role. Jolie's English accent is probably the best contribution from the cast; it's exactly how everyone imagines a British Naval Offcier would have sounded.

The plot's weak and seems to merely be a device for showing a spitfire blow things up in different places, which again, is a shame.

Everything is secondary to the visuals in a film which unfortunately, is all style and no substance.

Regardless, it's entertaining. You can sit back and switch off for two hours, and, after all, isn't that all we really want from films?

Sky Captain is a Lifeless and Dull Indiana Jones

[JeremyHowe171 · 5/10 · 18 September 2004]

In a word, this film was boring. It lacked life and spark. A big problem is with the two leads. Jude Law and Gwyneth Paltrow had no chemistry whatsoever. He was boring, and she was annoying.

The visuals were interesting, but they didn't enhance the scenes. If anything, the visuals tended to detach the audience from what was happening on screen. None of the action sequences felt real, and hence, the film failed to create any real drama or a sense of danger.

The film had potential, but it needed a better script, better acting, and a better director. I kept thinking during the film, you know, this movie would've worked if Harrison Ford was Sky Captain, Karen Allen was Polly, and Steven Spielberg was the director.

Ignore the critical acclaims for this film. The critics I think are praising the film because they *want* to like it and want it to succeed even though it fails on so many different levels.

Visuals And Audio Are Incredble; Story Is So-So

[ccthemovieman-1 · 8/10 · 4 November 2005]

Wow, what an amazing visual film. Being someone who loves cinematography and artwork in general, I acquired this film quickly after hearing about it. I wasn't disappointed, except for the story which was just so-so.

Almost the whole film is computerized and almost has a painting-like look to it. In fact, many scenes look as if Edward Hopper had painted them. Yet, it is a live-action movie with real actors whose faces aren't altered, except for Gywneth Paltrow's hair which is made more blondish and shimmering.

Story-wise, it's nothing special, just a corny old-time serial story about someone using high-tech robots and spaceships to take over the planet. The time period, however, is pre-World War II so to see this futuristic type of robot is a bit of a stretch. Nonetheless, it's a strictly old-fashioned sci-fi story with little profanity and, except for the robots, a great retro look.

Going back to that "look," this film is still very worthy of viewing because it's absolutely stunning to see. There truly is nothing quite like it. I'm sorry it didn't do well at the box office because that won't encourage others to make more of these visually-inventive kind of films. This must look beyond incredible on an expensive plasma TV set!

Also notable is the sound. The better the sound system you have, the more you will be blown away with the audio here. It's as good as the visuals. If only the story was as good!

I enjoyed it

[ericstevenson · 7/10 · 24 March 2017]

It's pretty odd how the ratings for this movie here aren't that high, but there actually are a lot of positive reviews. I guess I'm with the people who genuinely enjoyed it, even though it wasn't great. I think it's mostly because of how outright beautiful this film looks. I mean, the way everything is shot just makes it look authentic and it seems to be a great tribute to the old film serials. Granted, I don't think I've ever really seen any of those, but this certainly looks faithful. Anyway, this movie begins with giant robots appearing (always a good start) and people investigating to see where they came from.

I admit that the dialogue isn't that good, but there really are some pretty good characters in this. I really did find myself rooting for the relationship between the male and female lead. The way they bonded was actually quite cute. I think the film's length was good, even though the pacing could have been better. I was glad I saw it and even though I would not quite recommend it, it was enjoyable. It's not that great of a story but for me it was a fun little film that was at least above average. It had pretty creative ideas even if they weren't executed that well. ***

Souless, Cliché, Dull

[james_bickert · 1/10 · 17 September 2004]

Visually interesting, but falls flat in the originality department. This tedious excercise in technique wears thin after the opening battle. Jude Law has the charisma of burnt toast, but in his defense this film contains some of the worst dialogue I have ever seen on the big screen. In fact the script is so poor that it keeps taking you out of the film, and had me thinking about work, bills, my dogs, etc. There are many moments that scream bluescreen. Paltrow is as wooden as they get. This could of been saved by snappy film noir dialogue or over the top camp. My only complaint on the technique is that Black & White film (sorry, computer) would of helped because it looks like Turner colorized black and white. Just a big dull cliché mess. I would rather break my femur than sit through this endurance test again.

This film is incredible

[funkyfry · 9/10 · 4 November 2004]

I read through some of the other comments on here... I can't imagine who went to this movie expecting it to be full of philosophy or deep thinking, it's just a fun thrill ride type of movie and it is one of the best of those types of films to appear in decades. I knew the film would be cool looking because I caught a few minutes of it at a drive-in, but when I watched the whole movie it really blew me away as a well-conceived well-executed whole. I liked the characters, I didn't think they were "realistic" but they were fun in the old-school movie kind of way. It reminded me somewhat of a Howard Hawks film, actually. I like the love triangle here and wish it had been developed more. The visuals are just amazing. This movie is in every way better than the new Star Wars movies.... it has the great futuristic dogfights that were so great in the first 3 SW movies but are missing in the new films, and its effects are better thought out and better done than "Attack of the Clones".

Everybody who likes science fiction or just who likes good old-fashioned movies should see this film. It is suitable for kids and for adults. Very good photography and direction, I think this one will be appreciated by film fans looking to the new fronteirs of filming also. This film gave me some hope, at long last, that Hollywood will not become a wasteland of effects without good story, so I am indeed surprised that many posters here consider it to be just that. To me, this film is a gem.

Most people just don't get it.

[ripjarvis · 7/10 · 7 April 2012]

You need to watch a couple of Science fiction serials of the 1930's and then you might understand. If they had had CGI available to them they would have looked like this. This is nothing more or less than a love letter to "Flying Disc Man From Mars" & "Flash Gordon." When you look at the story you have to understand that it is built around the model of films like "Radar Men From the Moon" and others of the genre, it is simple (for kids there for their Saturday morning adventure fix. You can't look at a serial like a grown up, not with that critical eye They was never meant for critics. They were made to make young fellows gasp at the villains and the cliff hangers, not to make you meditate on the state of the universe. If you wait for deep meaning, then you will be waiting a long time. "Sky Captain" takes us back to the days of "Hopalong Cassidy" and Gene Autry (Star of the first Scince Fiction Serial "The Phantom Empire.") If you can divorce your critical self, sit down with a box of popcorn and some Ju-Ju Bes and turn off the lights, let yourself be 8 again. Now...the pay off!

Awfully boring and boringly awful

[BruceMc · 1/10 · 19 September 2004]

"Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow" (an amazingly incovenient title) is simply a bad movie; it has no heart, no deep ideas, nothing very special about it. Yes, the CGI backgrounds look interesting, but the result is that the whole thing is shot in an annoying soft focus. Additionally, the movie uses music the same way as, say, "Gilligan's Island" or the Scooby-Doo cartoons-- IT NEVER STOPS. Terribly, simply terrible. There are no fresh ideas, either, just gobs and gobs and gobs and... etc., of bits taken from older movies and serials. There is no gatekeeper here, the movie just seems to exist because it can. Save your money and your time. Not entertaining at all.